Big 12's patience pays off with College Football Playoff spot

— -- GRAPEVINE, Texas -- College Football Playoff selection committee chair Jeff Long said on Sunday that the 12 people tasked with choosing the top four teams in the country are not trying to send any messages -- and yet within the same breath added, "I think you can look at our rankings and get messages."

Here's one they delivered to the Big 12: You're in -- no championship game required.

"I don't know that two years makes a trend," said CFP executive director Bill Hancock, "but clearly we know now that you don't have to have a championship game to play in this playoff."

No. 4 Oklahoma is proof that the Big 12's patience paid off.

One year after one-loss Baylor was snubbed and TCU dropped from No. 3 to No. 6 in the final ranking, the Big 12 champion not only earned a spot in the coveted top four, but it did so with a loss to a terrible Texas team. While the rest of the Power 5 conferences captured the country's attention on Saturday with thrilling conference championship games, the Sooners sat in their shadow and waited, their playoff résumé complete. The only question heading into Selection Day was not whether OU was in, it was at what spot -- No. 3 or No. 4?

In the end, Michigan State jumped Oklahoma for the No. 3 spot after beating undefeated Iowa to win the Big Ten title -- but nobody knocked the Sooners out.

"One year doesn't make a trend and probably two years doesn't either," Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby told ESPN.com on Sunday. "We always knew some years we were going to love the model, and other years we'd wish we had a chance to play one more game. The one thing we still have to ponder, it was stated that part of the reason why Michigan State jumped over Oklahoma is there was the 13th data point issue. It appears we're at some disadvantage, but on this occasion, it didn't keep us from getting in, but on some other occasion it might like it did last year. I think we have to continue to be thoughtful about it."

The Big 12's levelheaded approach has been refreshing in spite of the temptation to fall prey to the knee-jerk reactions and criticism that followed Year 1 of the CFP. Nobody took more heat last season than the Big 12, which was chastised for producing co-champions in spite of a slogan that declared "one true champion." The response was calculated. There were no hasty invitations carelessly tossed out last year asking mediocre programs to join the Big 12 just for the sake of having a championship game.

Instead there has been careful consideration of the possibility of expansion, knowing the decision could only be made if schools increased the value of the league. The less drastic alternative would be for some form of deregulation to pass in January -- if the Power 5 conferences could come to an agreement on it -- allowing the Big 12 to have a title game with its current 10 teams. The other option is to stay status quo for another year or two to better gauge if the conference is truly at a disadvantage.

Don't forget -- while the Big Ten title game boosted Michigan State into the top four, it's also the very reason then-No. 4 Iowa got knocked out. Conference championship games work both ways -- as a dagger for some, a ticket for others. Oklahoma didn't have to worry about being knocked out of the playoff by one of its own conference rivals this season.

Bowlsby is not afraid to change the Big 12, but he and the conference athletic directors have shown they're going to be thorough in the process. Whether it implements a championship game under the current structure or expands, the Big 12 will do what's necessary to best position itself for a spot in the College Football Playoff.

This year? It didn't have to do anything but win.

That message was clear.

Who you play matters

Man up and schedule up.

It's impossible to truly know if North Carolina would have earned a spot in the top four had it upset No. 1-ranked Clemson, but there is no denying that wins over two FCS schools held the Tar Heels back in the committee's weekly rankings this season.

Long, the committee chair, said so on numerous occasions.

When asked about scheduling on Selection Day, Long pointed to the American Athletic Conference's three ranked teams as an example of how important nonconference scheduling is.

"Those teams played up," he said, referring to Houston, Navy and Temple. "They played Power 5 teams. They won some of them. And I think that's a direct result of you seeing three of their teams in our Top 25, and that could be played out with the Power 5 teams, as well. You need to play nonconference games that test your team against out-of-conference opponents, and I do think that's demonstrated throughout our ranking. ... I think conferences and ADs are looking at the rankings and determining that."

The challenge now is for athletic directors everywhere to ditch their old method of scheduling -- which often happens 10 years in advance -- and follow their own basketball model. In order for that to happen, though, all of them have to agree to do it, and many of them fear that change.

Lose early, not late

Another trend has emerged after watching two years of the playoff unfold, and that's the timing of losses. Clearly it's better to lose early than it is in November, just by the nature of the sport's calendar. Take a look back at when the losses occurred for these semifinalists:

2014
Alabama: 23-17 at Ole Miss, Oct. 4
Oregon: 31-24 vs. Arizona, Oct. 2
Florida State: N/A
Ohio State: 35-21 vs. Virginia Tech, Sept. 6

2015
Clemson: N/A
Alabama: 43-37 vs. Ole Miss, Sept. 19
Michigan State: 39-38 at Nebraska, Nov. 7
Oklahoma: 24-17 vs. Texas, Oct. 10

Michigan State is the only team that lost in November, but it also played the No. 3 (Ohio State) and No. 4 (Iowa) teams in two of its final four games and won the Big Ten title. Most teams are going to lose, but it can be forgiven in the playoff era -- especially if happens before the first ranking is even revealed.

"Certainly some committee members may look at late losses or late wins, impressive wins more strongly than others," Long said, "but as a group we discuss them in terms of a win in September and a win in November are equal, especially if they're against quality teams and quality opponents."